![]() |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
#3 | ||||||
|
wonder if one did a rockwell hardness test of harden lock plates and floor plates vs hardened receivers, would one find that the thinner metal lock plates and floor plates would be harder than the receiver...the theory being that thinner bar stock parts would in fact be harder than the thicker roll stock receivers? if so, perhaps harder metal retains case colors better and longer and than does less hard metal...all else being the same, of coarse.
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
#4 | ||||||
|
Ed,
![]()
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
#5 | ||||||
|
In a roundabout way, you're getting towards the answer. The thinner section parts receive a cycle time sufficient to reach the center of the mass, while heavier sectioned materials likely receiving the same duration 'soak', so not likely to reach the mass center. This is why thinner parts, whose shapes are more uniform, have a more uniformly colored surface, unlike receivers, whose colors vary directly in relation to the section thickness.
A part whose shape was achieved by forging, has a tighter grain structure than a part whose shape was formed by machining a cold rolled material, but, and a big but, the two parts have a substantially similar grain structure when the cool down from the 'soak' temperature begins, which is when the part absorbs any carbon-rich propertiess from the packing material. You keep mentioning shotguns whose frames were made by machining a cold rolled bar, as opposed to a forging, and for the life of me, I can't think of any American made shotgun whose frame was not machined from a forged part. There were lots of well known forging companies, such as Billings & Spencer, who supplied near-net-shape parts to manufacturers who didn't have their own drop forging facility. The very logical reason is simply that machining time is much more expensive than forging to near net shape, then final machining less material. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
| The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to edgarspencer For Your Post: |
|
|
#6 | ||||||
|
brad: nice to hear from an expert.
"We utilize over 20 different process formulas to yield specific colors and patterns by brand and era" a question. after quench do you ever temper back a receiver to increase elasticity, so as to avoid the possibility of cracking under the stress of firing? or is this step not necessary under your processes? |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
#7 | ||||||
|
edgar: thanks for your input. i always learn from your posts.
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
#8 | ||||||
|
I have no intention of representing my work as a metalurgist. My goal is to simply replicate the structural and cosmetic entity that these guns represented. When I hear of accounts of temps at 1500 t0 1700 degrees, Iam concerned as to the damage that some people are doing to these precious guns. The utilization of blocking and fixturing techniques to achieve certian patterns is wrong, if you think that the original manufacturers did this, you are wrong. Case hardening just did that. It imparted hardness to soft steel, in a machineable state. The people that did this process were interested in a certian apperance as much as a structural benefit.
Each of them were craftsmen, not metalurgists. There individual goals were to establish a trademark look, different than the competion. They certianly accomplished that. You can Church up or tech up the process as much as you want, the truth remains that the colors and patterns are a result of the process application, the craftsmens work. Brad |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
| The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Brad Bachelder For Your Post: |
|
|
#9 | ||||||
|
I have had color work done on a few guns by Malcom Clark (who used to work for CMSC) and I am sure that he also colors fully assembled. I am sure it has been done both ways. That is why I originally posed that question.
__________________
B. Dudley |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
#10 | ||||||
|
Original Trojans. So do the experts believe that these demonstrate that the action frames and floorplates were case color hardened as a combined unit?
Bruce Day, Parker learner's permit applicant |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bruce Day For Your Post: |
![]() |
|
|